RIPPA Posted October 7 Author Posted October 7 HOUSE (originally: Hausu): (Nobuhiko Ôbayashi, 1977) IMDB : ROTTEN TOMATOES : METACRITIC Selected by Lawful Jr. “House is of the craziest films I’ve ever seen. The director Nobuhiko Obayashi had his ten year old daughter help him write the film believing that adults "only think about things they understand ... everything stays on that boring human level" while "children can come up with things that can't be explained". He also was somehow inspired by Spielberg’s Jaws to make the film, despite it being absolutely nothing like Jaws in any way shape or form. It is so unabashedly creative that it has stayed with me as an example of what film can be capable of. It is also one of my biggest recommendations to anyone with an interest in film, as well as anyone who loves horror as it uses its insanity to attack the senses with the most otherworldly and absurdly terrifying moments I’ve seen in a film.” Reviewed by @driver I got lucky and saw this was on Max as a Criterion Collection release. This film looks gorgeous. I'm guessing that there is a meaning behind the characters being named Gorgeous, Fantasy, Kung Fu, Mac, Sweet, Prof and Melody. The white fluffy cat is so cute. And it's showing up everywhere. So I guess an alternate title could be "That Darn Cat". The way the movie is shot makes it seem very dreamy. There are quite a few funny sight gags and a few are at odd times. Considering the overall dreamlike tone of the movie maybe the timing was that odd at all. They got really creative with the kills. Death by mattress I'm looking at you. What an odd movie. I'm glad I got to review this. I guess best sum it up as That Darn Cat. EDITOR'S NOTES: Archive.Org has it uploaded - https://archive.org/details/house_202104 Trailer is technically NSFW for a brief moment of boobies 5
Curt McGirt Posted October 8 Posted October 8 (edited) How in the world has that not already been reviewed?! Also, I didn't really care for it when I saw most of it on TV. I might be the only person who hasn't. Edited October 8 by Curt McGirt 1
Travis Sheldon Posted October 8 Posted October 8 I admire the film for it's legacy in Japanese horror. But I, too, found it lacking. Maybe it had been built up so much that my expectations were way high. 1
RIPPA Posted October 8 Author Posted October 8 SHRIEK OF THE MUTILATED (Michael Findlay, 1974) IMDB : ROTTEN TOMATOES SELECTED BY @Travis Sheldon I originally saw this on UHF TV back in the 70s and again when I picked it up as part of a horror DVD set in the early 2000s. The film always looked like garbage when viewed in those formats. Vinegar Syndrome released a nice Blu-Ray of this title and after viewing it my opinion did a complete turnaround. What I once thought of as a cheap and horrible looking mess, became a fun and somewhat subversive little grindhouse creature feature. I'm sure whomever reviews this will hate the film. REVIEWED BY @The Comedian So my movie this year is 1974's Shriek of the Mutilated, directed by Michael Findlay. Hell of a title, that. At some college in the Northeast, we meet four grad students of one Dr. Prell: golden boy Keith, his girlfriend Karen, boy crazy Lynn, and cynical Tom. They're going on a field trip with Prell the next day to Boot Island, somewhere in northern New York or southern Canada (they ain't quite clear about it) to hunt... the Yeti! If they had the internet back then, they could have saved a lot of trouble and found out that Ron Reis is a California guy. Or, you know, someone could have told the great genius Dr. Prell the difference between yetis and sasquatches. Anyway, Keith gets roped into a fancy dinner with Prell while the other three go to a campus party. It's a swinging party, complete with both a popcorn machine and the rights to use the early 70's proto-electronica classic (and future music for the arcade game Pengo) "Popcorn" by Hot Butter. Unfortunately the party gets disrupted by the appearance of Dr. Prell's previous protege, Spencer. When Lynn asks him about his experience with Prell, he goes a bit nuts. He then killjoys the whole party by telling the tale of Prell's previous Yeti expedition, seven years earlier, of which Spencer is the only student survivor. Everyone's buzz harshed, the party breaks up. And here's where the movie gets it's first real sleaze points. It's certainly not uncommon for a horror movie to kill off an expository character after they've done their job, but since Spencer's not where the action will be, they had to be creative here. So Spencer proceeds to go home and get into a domestic dispute with his wife over his drinking, which ends with them killing each other. Meanwhile, Prell impressed Keith with dinner at a very exclusive place. The main course in fact is a dish called jin sung, an off-menu item of mystery meat. And of course, mystery meat in a horror movie is rarely a good thing. The next morning, the gang heads off to Boot Island, complete with the obligatory stop at a gas station, where the attendant seems a bit apprehensive about their destination (a trope that goes back at least to Jonathan Harker freaking out the people at the Inn when they find out who's castle he's headed to.) At Boot Island, they meet Prell's associate Dr. Werner, the island's owner. We also get our first jump scare with the introduction of Werner's totally not indigenous indigenous man servant, the hulking Laughing Crow. Werner hasn't seen the Yeti, but he's heard it and knows it's here. What follows is a series of increasingly ridiculous attempts to capture the beast, paired with a rising body count among our student bodies... OK, this movie wants desperately to be some real down and dirty grindhouse fare. Obviously, you've got that title. There's the (literally) shocking way they dispose of Spencer. The characters are properly unlikable; protagonist Keith is a self-interested asshole with his head firmly up Prell's ass, and any attempt at heroism he makes gets fucked up royally. And there's actually a plot in here that's not half bad. I mean, an experienced horror afficionado will likely guess the twist to the ending, but that doesn't mean it's a bad one. It's actually pretty well thought out and teased through the movie. And it actually helps to explain what otherwise would have been some of the film's shortcomings. Unfortunately, where the plot is more-or-less solid, the dialogue is fucking atrocious, the acting is all over the place, and the editing is shit. For instance, I'm pretty sure Keith declares that he's figured out the plot twist at least a couple times after he already has figured out the plot twist. Perhaps the most damning thing of all for a wannabe-grindhouse flick however, is the complete lack of gore effects. Seriously, this is "show that someone's face has been clawed by a wild beast by painting three stripes of fake blood across their cheek" bad for the entire movie. Didn't bother me as much, as I'm not a gore guy. I'm a psychological horror guy. A Silent Hill > Resident Evil type. But trying to please the 70's grindhouse crowd, you can see why it was a dud. At any rate, it is a product of the cynical 70's, so don't expect any kind of a happy ending here... EDITOR'S NOTE Can be found on Tubi 2
Curt McGirt Posted October 8 Posted October 8 The video box for that -- maybe just the title -- freaked me out as a kid. When I finally saw that trailer on a supercut of trailers I was like "well that was a letdown"
Execproducer Posted October 8 Posted October 8 Oh man, I was 7 years old when we saw this at the drive-in. Horrible movie but, at that age, absolutely spell-binding. I have never been able to listen to Hotel California without thinking of this film. Yet another reason to hate The Eagles.
No Point Stance Posted October 9 Posted October 9 (edited) 15 hours ago, RIPPA said: It's a swinging party, complete with both a popcorn machine and the rights to use the early 70's proto-electronica classic (and future music for the arcade game Pengo) "Popcorn" by Hot Butter. Funny you should mention it; the use of that track was in something of a rights limbo for decades, I guess because the producers failed to anticipate home video and the film existing in perpetuity. For a long time every official release of the film had 'Popcorn' replaced or the scene clumsily excised Edited October 9 by No Point Stance 1
Lawful Metal Posted October 11 Posted October 11 I've lost access to my movie on the internet archive. not streaming anywhere else! Sorry! Ive watched about half of it
No Point Stance Posted October 12 Posted October 12 I'll be watching my movie at some point over the weekend so hopefully will have my review in early next week.
J.T. Posted October 13 Posted October 13 (edited) What Curt said. How in the fuck has no one picked House yet? I have the Criterion of House. This is what came with it. The shirt fucking rules. As for the movie itself. I enjoyed it for what it is: a rather brave and totally baffling piece of film making. I cannot fault Obayashi for going all experimental. Sometimes you gotta try new things. There are times in House when I cannot tell if it wants me to be frightened by or to laugh at the obvious absurdity. The shifting of gears between chuckle and gasp is not entirely seamless as it is in something like Shaun of the Dead or Attack the Block. It is hard to classify House as a horror comedy because it seems to take itself very seriously and there are some innovatively nightmarish moments in this movie.. Maybe it's supposed to be like the Tetsuo movies or The Story of Riki-Oh where the violence is the joke? I am not certain. One thing is sure. Onscreen boobs will make you forgive a lot when it comes to a movie and its faults. Edited October 16 by J.T. 4
ohtani's jacket Posted October 13 Posted October 13 House makes more sense if you've seen other Obayashi films. Humor and magic realism are a big part of his work. 1
RIPPA Posted October 14 Author Posted October 14 On 10/11/2024 at 1:08 PM, Lawful Metal said: I've lost access to my movie on the internet archive. not streaming anywhere else! Sorry! Ive watched about half of it Yeah - Internet Archive was hacked so its been an issue It is currently in read only mode at the moment Fingers crossed it will be fully back soon I am sending you a link to a version that appears to be on Youtube
RIPPA Posted October 14 Author Posted October 14 BONUS REVIEW: NEVER LET GO (Alexandre Aja, 2024) IMDB : ROTTEN TOMATOES : METACRITIC Reviewed by @Andrew POE! I left Never Let Go with more questions than answers. The premise - Halle Berry's character takes two kids into the woods to hide from The Evil - had somewhat of a potential until very early on the movie lets slip what the twist would be. I knew it would be somewhat similar to The Village and....surprise surprise it was. It's almost like executives threw darts at "The Village" and "A Quiet Place" for this movie to attempt to build a franchise around it. A lot of the drama and tension was whether what Berry's character was encountering was real or imagined. Berry's character wraps her kids in the rope while a grotesque creature stalks around her - only she can see it because in a wide shot, we don't see it. The kids don't seem to see it either. The choice of Berry's character and her children using rope to link themselves to the house has a very interesting connotation based on African American history. The rope usually is synonymous with lynching or hanging - which many African Americans can recount relatives speaking in fear of the rope. It was a smart choice in a way because it was taking the power for those characters - although making themselves linked permanently to the house but out of their own fears is an equally bad idea. Usually with these types of movies, the source of the predicament is something from a character's past, a tragedy that befell a character, or a personal belief the character carries on. Berry's character believes the Evil to look like her mother (who is a white woman) - so is the issue due to Berry's character being a mixed race person? She then encounters a man who seems to know her children and talks like they were married and emobides The Evil as well - was it spousal abuse? In one scene, Berry's character plays "Big Rock Candy Mountain" on a record player, which is typically a song against capitalism and for left wing causes. Is the source of the character's madness a desire to escape society that cares little for the working people? Was she a hobo at some point? The movie offers practically zero clues as to what's going on. No sooner does Berry's character gets introduced that she kills herself, thus taking the mystery of the movie with her. The movie lands on the two child actors Percy Daggs IV and Anthony B Jenkins, who are decent given the material. The director Alexandre Aja thankfully didn't give them a ton of dialogue and almost just let them be kids with this world. At some point, Samuel seems to see the Evil as well, which completely tosses out the window it being a product of his mother's mental illness. By that point, I was like "whatever movie, just get done" and made a beeline out of the theater when the credits started rolling. Cinematography throughout the movie is woefully inadequate and seems drab. Alexandre Aja can't seem to escape that this is dull, low stakes horror. It's crazy that this turned out this way when Aja has done scarier horror movies. The cinematographer Maxime Alexandre has worked with Aja in the past, so I'm not exactly sure why the look of the movie ended up this way. I will say I loved the tracking shot near the start of the movie and the usage of split diopter shots during the breakfast scene and on the porch. EDITOR'S NOTE This was not the movie I teased referenced. Turns out my tease could have applied to three different movies. But more on that later. 2
bobholly138 Posted October 14 Posted October 14 On 10/8/2024 at 12:20 PM, Travis Sheldon said: I admire the film for it's legacy in Japanese horror. But I, too, found it lacking. Maybe it had been built up so much that my expectations were way high. Same,heard about it for years. Then saw it and it's ok. Nothing amazing but good.
Travis Sheldon Posted October 15 Posted October 15 Back to Shriek of the Mutilated for a sec. When I watched the new scan and actually was able to pay closer attention to the film I realized it was a competent flick. The bit with the guy who goes off the deep end at the party and then proceeds to go home to off his wife over her not wanting him to drink anymore was so out of left field. Plus the fact that he didn't get the job done really put a WTF?! on that whole scenario. The use of Berlioz's "Dream of a Witches Sabbath" gave the arrival scene a Eyes Wide Shut vibe. Fun film. Would be neat to hear the Rifftrax guys take it on. 2
odessasteps Posted October 15 Posted October 15 I keep wanting to make a William Kay/George Wendt joke but just not getting it to work. 1
The Comedian Posted October 15 Posted October 15 3 hours ago, odessasteps said: I keep wanting to make a William Katt/George Wendt joke but just not getting it to work. I actually like that House more than the Japanese one... 1
(BP) Posted October 16 Posted October 16 I will always maintain that the greatest sequel title of all time is House: The Second Story. 5 3
No Point Stance Posted October 16 Posted October 16 8 hours ago, (BP) said: I will always maintain that the greatest sequel title of all time is House: The Second Story. It's sad that the very fun 1988 flick Scarecrows never got the sequel hinted at in Fangoria at the time; Scarecrows II: The Last Straw. 3
RIPPA Posted October 16 Author Posted October 16 12 hours ago, (BP) said: I will always maintain that the greatest sequel title of all time is House: The Second Story. For the record House: The Second Story WAS selected before
RIPPA Posted October 16 Author Posted October 16 THE CREEPING TERROR (Vic Savage, 1964) IMDB : ROTTEN TOMATOES SELECTED BY @driver Creeping Terror was probably one of the first horror movies I ever saw as a kid. That sufficient enough of a reason?:D REVIEWED BY @twiztor The Creeping Terror (1964) starring Vic Savage and Shannon O'Neil. directed by Vic Savage (oh, that can't be good). plot: a spaceship crash lands on Earth. a creature escapes, with another confined in the ship. The escaped creature [think of a slug that's also a Chinese Dragon puppet. It has a vagina gaping hole in its chest that it uses to injest any prey it stumbles across] ambles the countryside, eating increasingly larger groups of people (a couple making out in the woods, a man & grandson fishing, a group of hippies singing Kumbaya, a dance hall jampacked full of people, and finally a group of people at Lover's Lane). Eventually (spoiler alert) the Army kills the escaped creature (more on that in a minute), while the 2nd creature now escapes and is also killed. OK, let's get the technical aspects out of the way here. This film looks bad. REALLY BAD. Obviously you're not going to get 4k out of a 60 year old black and white B-movie, so this is somewhat expected. But the film is very grainy and majorly washed out. The sound is bad on many levels- the audio and video aren't aligned. the Narrator (yes, there is a narrator here) is loud while the dialogue is quiet. The music and sound effects are also mixed way louder than the dialogue. There's multiple bad shots included here: a few different scenes with the sole lighting being a flashlight. Really wonderful when your movie already looks bad. We go to shaky cam the couple of times we look at things from the monster's perspective. There is one interesting shot in which we get a first person POV of a man getting punched in the face. A bit later we get a dash view through a windshield where the scenery is fuzzy and there is a windshield wiper across the screen, obscuring the view. The story is told mainly through the Narrator. I thought this was just a big exposition dump up front, but it continues through the entire 76 minutes of the film. It gives me 'educational video'/'documentary' vibes, but i don't know if that's what they were going for. The wooden acting, stilted dialogue, and COMPLETE LACK OF EMOTIONS FROM ANY AND EVERYONE all support this. Seriously, people are killed/disappeared and nobody mentions them. Martin Gordon (Savage) and his newlywed wife, Brett (O'Neill), seem entirely unconcerned with ANYTHING that happens. They make out a bunch, tho! (must be nice to be the director). One scene has Martin inviting a fellow police officer to his house, presumably for dinner and/or drinks, only to IMMEDIATELY ignore the guest and just make out with his wife. In the kitchen, at first, and then on the couch right next to the dude. I was worried this might turn into a swinger film, but the guest just stands up and leaves. And it's never mentioned again. The next morning, the wife sends her husband off to work. The baby starts crying. Wait, who's baby is that? Oh, that's not the main characters. It's a different couple, whom we haven't met before. She gets eaten while hanging out the laundry. The baby cries. It's never mentioned again. The monster next engages the hippie group singing. This is really just dumb, and i only mention it because the guy strumming his guitar while the ladies sit, enthralled, tries to fight the monster off by swinging his guitar at it. This is less exciting than a Jeff Jarrett KABONG!, which is really saying something. Scientist Bradford is examining the alien spacecraft and the creature that is still restrained. He is completely out of his depth, unable to ascertain anything. That's not what the movie is trying to portray, but it's true. The best explanation he can offer is 'this creature came from far beyond our planet'. He's more interested in what the ship is made of. And he's just throwing out wild guesses for everything else ('the creature doesn't want to communicate with us'; 'this creature was engineered') with absolutely no data to suggest such. Meanwhile, there's zero concern for the sheriff who was killed IN THAT VERY SPOT. As the creature comes up to the aforementioned dance hall, the best part of the movie occurs. It's just a scene of piano music playing and people dancing. We are panning through the dancers, with a new couple joining the dance floor every few seconds. It's a pretty competent shot. We linger at the end, where a man gestures to ask a woman (presumably his date) to dance. She declines. He stands up, speaks to the next table over, and walks to the dance floor with a different gal. so completely unnecessary. i love it. next scene, back at the dance halll, a woman has grown sick of her man and storms off with, towing a friend along with her. An alcoholic at the bar sneakily steals her margarita. None of this is ever menioned again. So the monster shows up at Lover's Lane. man, this movie is pretty much JUST couples making out. There's like half a dozen cars here, each with a young couple sucking face. Well, plus the guy that shows up just to watch. I'm not kidding. After the monster eats everyone, rando dude drives away. He is never mentioned again. Also, there's one couple in a car that has a bunch of writing on it. "23 Skidoo", which i guess they're trying to show that he's proud of his fast car? But it also says "Betty Fink Mobile", which i have no idea what that means. Anyway, the monster flips over the car and celebrates for some reason. We've finally reached the climax, where Scientist Bradford and the Army (1 Colonel and like 6 soldiers) show up. The Colonel agrees to not destroy the monster if possible. IMMEDIATELY, the soldiers start incessantly firing at the monster. Thanks, Army. It doesn't work and the monster eats the grunts. The Colonel takes out a grenade and runs at the beast. But he falls for some reason. Luckily, he's able to casually toss the grenade at the monster (off screen, but only a few feet in front of him) and the monster dies. All is well. But wait! The scientist reaches into the monster and produces a small metallic box. He rushes back to the ship. Meanwhile, there was an explosion (?) and the 2nd creature escapes. It tries to kill one Police officer, but the scientist arrives at that exact time and runs into the creature, killing it instantly. This one must be way less hardy than the first, which stood up to dozens of rounds of ammunition. The scientist now reveals all: These creatures were created by an alien race and sent to Earth to ingest humans, learning all about our physiology and vulnerabilities (sidenote: which are quite abundant, actually. We really have no natural defenses. soft skin that cuts easy, a complicated system of veins and arteries to transport blood, and squishy organs. To an alien civilization that can create violent bio-engineered killing machines AND have mastered space travel, we likely match up poorly in extreme physical contests). The box he found in the creature was a transmitter. It has been collecting this information and sending it back to a transmitter in the ship. Now that both creatures are dead, the transmitter will automatically beam this information back to the race that created it. ZERO explanation is even hinted at as to how or why he has this all figured out, or why he is just now revealing or trying to halt it. A soldier rushes in to stop the spread of information, but it is too late. This movie was a trip. I enjoyed it. Whether that's BECAUSE OF or IN SPITE OF its flaws, i cannot earnestly say right now. I had never heard of this movie and would never have run across it. But it was a good way to kill an hour and a half. Thank you to whoever suggested it. p.s. i see that MST3K has an episode for this film. There's not much talking in this, so i think that would play really well if you're into that sort of thing. EDITOR'S NOTE Driver changed his selection halfway through the process, but with his permission, I have his other choice to fit Twiztor in. Movie can be found on Tubi HERE is the MST3K version 4
odessasteps Posted October 16 Posted October 16 That’s a fun episode of MST3K, including a bit where Mike does the urban myth of coloring in a CD for it to play better. 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now